I don't think this is a new thread per se, so... We have a situation where we are trying to use a Text field as a memo field in an SQL (6.5) table. We have remote views setup and get a ...conversion from text to varchar... error whenever we enter a significant amount of data and then issue the update. You made it sound like it might be tricky to do, but possible. Is this an ODBC issue? Is there something we can do programatically to handle it? Thanks!

Regards, Renoir

>>Is there an advantage to using Varchar over Text in SQL*Server? Let's say I have a situation where the expected limits are under 4000 bytes, so that I might be willing to force a truncation in an Edit region, if there were benefits. Is there a (performance or feature-based) reason to avoid Text? Given my VFP heritage, my inclination is to think of Text as like Memo, and use it for anything long.
>>
>>TIA,
>>
>>-- Randy
>
>Varchar holds only up to 255 chars. If you need more than that you should use text. Text fields are not nearly as easy to use within Transact-SQL as memo fields, but they look just like regular memo fields in VFP. There can be problems with updating text fields when the VFP remote view is based on a SQL Server view. Remote views based on tables work fine.
>
>Text fields are slower in SQL that varchars, but that is to be expected. Like memo fields, you can't do LIKE operations.